India to ink largest-ever defence deal with the US soon

[+ghostrider883 526]

Indian Navy to purchase Boeing P-8Is to replace Tu-142s

 

Even as tensions with Pakistan persist in the wake of 26/11, India is now poised to ink its biggest-ever defence deal with US: the around Rs 8,500-crore contract for the supply of eight Boeing P-8I long-range maritime reconnaissance (LRMR) aircraft for the Navy.

 

The LRMR planes will replace the eight ageing and fuel-guzzling Russian-origin Tupolev-142Ms. Customised for India

and based on the Boeing 737 commercial airliner, the radar-packed P-8I aircraft will go a long way in plugging the huge gaps in Navy's maritime snooping capabilities with a range of over 600 nautical miles.

 

Incidentally, Navy is also in the hunt for six new medium-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft for around Rs 1,600 crore to achieve its aim of an effective three-tier surveillance grid in the entire Indian Ocean.

 

The LRMR deal will supplant last year's $962-million contract signed with US for six C-130J `Super Hercules' aircraft for use by Indian special forces.

 

US is still, however, leagues behind Russia, Israel and France in supplying military

hardware and software to India. While Russia notches up sales worth about $1.5 billion to India every year, Israel chalks up an annual tally of around $1 billion.

 

Apart from the C-130J deal, America's only big-ticket deal with India in recent years has been the $190-million contract in 2002 to supply 12 AN/TPQ-37 firefinder weapon-locating radars.

 

Then, of course, India last year acquired amphibious transport vessel USS Trenton for $48.23 million, with the six UH-3H helicopters to operate from it costing another $39 million.

 

During its quest for LRMR planes, India had earlier rejected the US offer to lease two P-3C Orion reconnaissance aircraft under a $133-million contract. India, of course, remains unhappy over the American decision to sell eight more P-3C Orion aircraft to Pakistan, which already has two such planes in its inventor

[charlielima 328]

Welcome aboard!

:ph34r: CL

[Atreides 144]

Good to hear. :yes: With the Indians looking elsewhere for defence equipment (other than Russia) maybe, just maybe the Russians wont take the Indians for granted. Hopefully(a BIG hoefully) they'll stop screwing the Indians for armament procurements with their ridiculous prices, the carrier fiasco being one of them.

[JediMaster 451]

I'm still not sure this P-8 is a good idea. I mean, a 737 to fly low and slow patrols over the water?? How did Boeing convince the USN that was a good idea??

[Stick 773]

Trials?

[charlielima 328]

I'm still not sure this P-8 is a good idea. I mean, a 737 to fly low and slow patrols over the water?? How did Boeing convince the USN that was a good idea??

 

Perhaps thier low and slow patrols will be faster?

Unfortunatly it appears the era of prop driven maritime patrol is coming to an end. Sniff.

My choice would still be an overpowered 4 engine turbo prop that the the crew would shut a motor down to save fuel. Replacing a fast swept wing turbo prop with a fast swept wing turbo fan doesn't sound to radical to me.

Monitoring sonobouys is generally done at a relative high altitude. Mad runs are done low. So a multi engine hotrod would be a candidate for ASW and Sea Surface Control.

My Dad flew P-2V Neptunes and 737s when I was a kid. He liked the 737. He said he felt like he was flying a fighter plane. I use to ask my dad alot of dumb questions about aviation but I never thought of asking him why the Navy didn't use 737s instead of P-2Vs.

I think the P-8 is an adequate choice. The 737 is a very sound airframe. It should save us alot of headaches and even tragedy that we had when we built all new technology weapons systems such as the H-3 SeaKing, F-111, Harrier, and V-22 Osprey:

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/p8a/index.html

A 737-800 with harpoon or tomahawk? Sure I'll take one.

With AIMs it could be a wicked P-3 Hunter.

With Mavericks ya'll will be chasing pirates like rats thru the tundra.

The towed decoy will be interesting and should drive modders crazy.

:ph34r: CL

Edited December 30, 2008 by charlielima

[+Typhoid 231]

as CL points out, the only real reason to go low and slow is for a MAD run. Generally when doing a sono bouy field, the plane drops the pattern in a low pass at medium speed and then monitors at medium altitude. Quite easy for the 737.

 

I was surprised by the choice for the same reasons - but on balance it makes sense and the 737-800 airframe is becoming more widespread in defense applications such as AEW and ELINT worldwide. Its a good plane.

 

Granted - there won't be any shutting one down when on station to save gas........

[Mannie 21]

I'm still not sure this P-8 is a good idea. I mean, a 737 to fly low and slow patrols over the water?? How did Boeing convince the USN that was a good idea??

 

Why does it need to be "low and slow"?

[JediMaster 451]

I thought planes like the 737 were optimized for 36k ft or so. Even if it's not flying right over the water at under 1000 ft like the P-3s do, I still would figure it's not going to climb that high between buoy drops. That means what, 10k ft or so? As mentioned, you can't shut off any engines when you only have 2, which the P-3s and others used to do to when you don't need to go fast. So while the normal range of a 737 far outstrips a P-3, it's going to burn a lot more fuel with climbing and descending and operating at non-optimal altitudes?

The slow part is because if you find something and need to turn around and drop buoys in a certain area, well, airliners aren't known for great agility.

[charlielima 328]

Doh! 2 jet engines on a land based ASW plane is not new.

 

 

 

Even though this is an artist rendering, I bet when dropping this depth bomb or torpedo alot of knots where stated on the check list to get ahead of this explosion. 2 turning and 2 burning where probably requiered or desirable when operating this low.

Indeed low but not slow.

:ph34r: CL

[+ghostrider883 526]

Deal confirmed, India orders Eight Boeing P-8Is

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

I thought planes like the 737 were optimized for 36k ft or so.

 

It won't be as agile as the P-3 at low altitudes, but the Allison T-56 (I think it's still the primary engine) has quite a few shortcoming in comparison to a current generation GE or Rolls Royce turbofan. Fuel efficiency and throttle response/acceleration are supposed to be a significant improvement over existing P-3 turboprops. Hell, if the Orions had the composite 6/8 blade and engine upgrade programs similar to that of the Herc, they'd be able to capitalise on the newer technology too. But wing fractures have been a increasing problem for the USN and will be for the rest of us soon (Especially for the RAAF if the add some of the stand off strike responsibilities frpm the F-111 when it's retired!).

 

The fact of the matter about the 737 choice is the economy of scale behind it. It's a new airframe and still in production. Development costs are much reduced, has a proven flight and safety record, although obviously, not under militart conditions such as the ASW flight profile thus far. And... the P-3 is a 47 year old design. Still doing a fantastic job though!

 

Hey Ghost, why only 8? I always figured India has a MASSIVE and busy coastline. 8 always seemed insuficient...

[+Typhoid 231]

I thought planes like the 737 were optimized for 36k ft or so. Even if it's not flying right over the water at under 1000 ft like the P-3s do, I still would figure it's not going to climb that high between buoy drops. That means what, 10k ft or so? As mentioned, you can't shut off any engines when you only have 2, which the P-3s and others used to do to when you don't need to go fast. So while the normal range of a 737 far outstrips a P-3, it's going to burn a lot more fuel with climbing and descending and operating at non-optimal altitudes?

The slow part is because if you find something and need to turn around and drop buoys in a certain area, well, airliners aren't known for great agility.

 

P-3 is based on an airliner. We used to do some airfield manuevers with the E-4B that got our rendevous parties "interested".

 

Airliners are known for their easy manuevers simply because that is what keep passengers coming back.

[charlielima 328]

The only Naval land based ASW bird I can think of that was not based on a commercial design was the P-2V Neptune.

Hudson = ?

Nimrod = comet

Orion = electra

The way this 737-800 thing is going I bet within a year somebody here will snivel for an

AP-8 Spartan gunship. Okay I want one. No two. One in Hill Grey and one in Euro camo.

:ph34r: CL

Edited January 6, 2009 by charlielima

[Badger Lead 0]

Cool. I think India and the US could grow to be great allies in the near future. I hope so, anyway.

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

The only Naval land based ASW bird I can think of that was not based on a commercial design was the P-2V Neptune.

 

I got 2:

Breguet Atlantique

Tu-142 Bear F

 

[+ghostrider883 526]

Hey Ghost, why only 8? I always figured India has a MASSIVE and busy coastline. 8 always seemed insuficient...

 

Many of Navy's HAL/Dornier Do-228s have been modernized, weaponized and fitted with new sensors for maritime patrol ops. Many new airframes have been ordered by the Navy & Coast guard. It however has a very short range and is used for "localised" maritime patrol. I see them regularly from my house flying near the shore.

The Navy now has a three tier maritime patrol plan for the future.

1. Long range MPA : P-8I/Tu-142, IL-38SD

2. Medium range MPA : proposed Embraer 145 platform

3. Short Range MPA : Do-228

[+Typhoid 231]

Cool. I think India and the US could grow to be great allies in the near future. I hope so, anyway.

 

working pretty closely already in a lot of areas

[charlielima 328]

I got 2:

Breguet Atlantique

Tu-142 Bear F

 

 

Thanks. Those are 2 I wasn't sure about, and I new someone here would fill in the blanks.

Did the Bear start off as a strategic bomber?

Shackelton, Catalinas, Albatros, Goose, Mariner, Mars, Ventura / Harpoon?

WW2 pilosophy placed some bombers in the ASW roll.

B-24, B-17, British types.

So India only ordered 8 P-8s because they have Dornier Do-228s?

Dornier Do-228s? Please. I'd rather do ASW with a 2 seat grumman air tractor, binos and an

M14 rifle. then that crate.

Hmm? Single engine turbo prop plane with a towed MAD bird, MK-46 torp?

Peter O'Toole had less then that with a grumman duck in Murphy's War.

The Embraers? Good choice.

You think India could of picked up some Soviet Mays at one time?

No dis to any country here but I have a strong belief that all soveriegn nations should have a wicked ASW / sea surface control force. India is on the pointy end of the sword (Kuhkra?) here.

:ph34r: CL

Edited January 6, 2009 by charlielima

[+Typhoid 231]

"You think India could of picked up some Soviet Mays at one time.

 

I'm pretty sure they did for awhile.

 

yes, the Tu-142 is based on the Bear strategic bomber. We call it the Bear F.

Edited January 6, 2009 by Typhoid

[charlielima 328]

"You think India could of picked up some Soviet Mays at one time.

 

I'm pretty sure they did for awhile.

 

yes, the Tu-142 is based on the Bear strategic bomber. We call it the Bear F.

 

Hey Typhoid,

Are you a tube rat?

I'm not but:

 

:ph34r: CL

Edited January 6, 2009 by charlielima

[+Typhoid 231]

Hey Typhoid,

Are you a tube rat?

I'm not but:

 

:ph34r: CL

 

in a manner of speaking. Hawkeye backend most of the time. We referred to that as "scope dope".

 

but qualed up front too.

[charlielima 328]

Hmm?

Flying AT? I meet gobs of guys in the economy that were on Willy Victors.

I'm a bull GIB?

I just checked out the P-8 on the site.

There is no flight engineer.

Another black day for Navel Aircrew Men.

I remember gobs of folks kicked and scratched and all we got was one enlisted in the back of the

S-3 Viking.

Every day I pin "stuff" on my current uniform it feels wrong without my aircrew wings.

:ph34r:

Edited January 7, 2009 by charlielima

[+ghostrider883 526]

So India only ordered 8 P-8s because they have Dornier Do-228s?

 

No, the Navy does have a strong(compared to our neighbouring countries) but ageing ASW a/c fleet

IL-38SD

Aircraft delivered to date: IN301 (1977) - upgraded to 'SD' standard

...................................IN303 (1977) - upgraded to 'SD' standard

...................................IN305 (1983) - upgraded to 'SD' standard

...................................IN306 - upgraded to 'SD' standard

...................................IN307 - upgraded to 'SD' standard

IN302 & 304 were lost in a MAC over Goa in 2002

 

Tu-142M

Aircraft Serial Numbers: IN-311

................................IN-312

................................IN-313

................................IN-314

................................IN-315

................................IN-316

................................IN-317

................................IN-318

 

Do-228

Aircraft in service : Unknown

 

Besides these , there are ASW helos such as Ka-25, 28 , Chetak(Alouette III) and Sea King Mk.42B

 

Dornier Do-228s? Please. I'd rather do ASW with a 2 seat grumman air tractor, binos and an

M14 rifle. then that crate.

 

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/aviatio...ier-do-228.html

I have bad memories of lying in this aircraft when I was a kid. It was operated by an Indian arline called "Vayudoot" and used to fly between Mumbai & a place called Diu. It was a pretty scary experience flying in rough weather.

 

You think India could of picked up some Soviet Mays at one time?

No dis to any country here but I have a strong belief that all soveriegn nations should have a wicked ASW / sea surface control force. India is on the pointy end of the sword (Kuhkra?) here.

:ph34r: CL

India already had a fleet of IL-38s. Russia donated two IL-38s fom its reserve after two IL-38s were lost in 2002 in a Mid Air Collision killing all its crew.

You mean "Khukri" ? The Gurkha knife? The hindi word for Sword in "Talwar".

Edited January 7, 2009 by ghostrider883

[+Typhoid 231]

Hmm?

Flying AT? I meet gobs of guys in the economy that were on Willy Victors.

I'm a bull GIB?

I just checked out the P-8 on the site.

There is no flight engineer.

Another black day for Navel Aircrew Men.

I remember gobs of folks kicked and scratched and all we got was one enlisted in the back of the

S-3 Viking.

Every day I pin "stuff" on my current uniform it feels wrong without my aircrew wings.

:ph34r:

 

I'm a retired Naval Flight Officer